The opinion of the court was delivered by: John A. Mendez United States District Court Judge
JOHN R. MANNING (SBN 220874) ATTORNEY AT LAW 1111 H Street, # 204 Sacramento, CA. 95814 (916) 444-3994 Fax (916) 447-0931 Attorney for Defendant DAVID JOPSON
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE
Date: June 19, 2012 Time: 9:30 a.m.
Judge: Honorable John A. Mendez
IT IS HEREBY stipulated between the United States of America through its undersigned counsel, Todd Pickles, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Yan Ebyam, Matthew M. Scoble, Esq., counsel for defendant Thomas Jopson, William J. Portanova, Esq., counsel for defendant David Jopson, John R. Manning, Esq., counsel for defendant Jesus Bruce, Hayes H. Gable, Esq., counsel for defendant Aimee Sisco, J Toney, Esq., counsel for defendant Pablo Vasquez, David D. Fischer, Esq., counsel for defendant Dolf Podva, Carl E. Larson, Esq., counsel for defendant Donald Fried, Dan F. Koukol, Esq., and counsel for defendant Thomas Marrs, Ronald J. Peters, Esq., that the status conference presently set for April 24, 2012 be continued to June 19, 2012, at 9:30 a.m., thus vacating the presently set status conference.
Further, all of the parties, the United States of America and all of the defendants as stated above, hereby agree and stipulate that the Court should find the ends of justice served by the granting of such a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial and thattime within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act should thereforebe excluded under 18 U.S.C. Section 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(ii) and (iv), corresponding to Local Codes T-2 (unusual or complex case) and T-4 (to allow defense counsel time to prepare) from the date of the parties' stipulation, April 20, 2012, to and including June 19, 2012. All parties stipulate and agree that this case is unusual and complex within the meaning of the Speedy Trial Act, as this case involves over 2,000 pages of initial discovery, six search warrants, and nine co-defendants. Defendant Yan Ebyam is named as a defendant in two indictments pending before this Court, Case Nos. 2:11-CR-276 JAM and 2:11-CR-275 JAM, and Hoffman, et al., 2:11-MJ-312 KJN is factually related to this matter. On April 2, 2012 the Government released a CD that was delivered to defense counsel on April 9, 2012 containing voluminous additional discovery. Finally, defense counsel learned on April 12, 2012 another CD of discovery would be made available through the designated discovery service. All defendants request more time to review this additional discovery and conduct investigation to prepare each defendant's defense.
IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED.
ORDER The Court, having received, read, and considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing there from, adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order. Based on the stipulation of the parties and the recitation of facts contained therein, the Court finds that this case is unusual and complex and that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings and trial itself within the time limits established in 18 U.S.C. § 3161. In addition, the Court specifically finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel to this stipulation reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.
The Court orders that the time from the date of the parties' stipulation, April 20, 2012, to and including June 19, 2012, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(ii) and (iv), and Local Codes T2 (unusual and complex case) and T4 (reasonable time for defense counsel to prepare). It is further ordered that the April 24, 2012, status conference shall be continued until June 19, 2012, at 9:30 a.m.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...